Nutter's out of his shell

Wattie's picture
Submitted by Wattie on Tue, 2011-12-13 08:54

Gareth Morgan has gone from hinting at being a bit of a mixed bag to totally barking mad:-

"In spectacular fashion, the global financial crisis has reminded us that freedom in economics will only get you so far; it needs to be strategically curbed by regulation and supported by effective redistribution. Freedom to lend certainly has come to an ignominious end".

Geezus, and he gets listened to by serious people.


( categories: )

Ufh

Jules Troy's picture

Sounds like the best way to make NZ happiest would be if Morgan stepped in front of a moving bus!  What a despicable excuse for a person. 

Listen up

Ross Elliot's picture

This is the man who made $47 million from the sale of trademe.co.nz.

The internet is one of the last, somewhat unfettered, vehicles for capitalism left in this world.

I guess some of the 1% really do seek to screw the 99%. A chardonnay socialist if ever I saw one.

My last post to the Pappa

Mark Hubbard's picture

My last post to the Pappa Morgan thread on interest.co.nz:

One final point, just to put the hatchet for good into this nonsense; all students of history and economics know to switch off when Morgan writes this point:

... 18th century as an unfettered industrial revolution made the poor poorer.

Unmitigated rubbish and lies. Bare faced lies.

von Mises put the truth well:

All the talk about the so-called unspeakable horror of early capitalism can be refuted by a single statistic: precisely in these years in which British capitalism developed, precisely in the age called the Industrial Revolution in England, in the years from 1760 to 1830, precisely in those years the population of England doubled.

Leave free men and women alone Gareth.

Um, no, one of my other posts to that thread also:

Kate, what I particularly despise in what Morgan writes now, is his language, which betrays his mind, and the mind of the true socialist. He uses redistribution so flippently: redistribution is theft, pure and simple, it's a violent, brutal act that a civilised society would have no bar of from the state. It represents the brute, barbaric state that is on its way to totalitarianism in one form or another.

And understand what is at the bottom his advocacy for redistribution: it's not about inequality, look at my links above, the issues around inequality are bullshit. Rather, it's always about a blackmail: the State must redistribute my income, otherwise the need that is grown by the welfare State will take it from me brutally.

I want out of the ignoble, rotten and corrupt world that Morgan sees in his own soul, the world created by our politicians and this Nanny State, protected by the iron fist of her Big Brother - I want my freedom from it.

The glaring mistake Morgan

Mark Hubbard's picture

The glaring mistake Morgan makes in his article ( http://www.interest.co.nz/opin... ) where for the first time he talks disparagingly about, quote, 'the ideal of freedom' - evil out in the open now, it's gloves off - is that he believes you can have political freedom independent of economic freedom, as if those two are not intrinsically linked.

I thought he was a well-read, intelligent man: he's obviously not. And he's very dangerous.

Even the business roundtable, on their new blog, make a pretty good fist of dealing to that OECD report (and no, I'm not 'backing' business round table simply by quoting them):

http://businessroundtable.word...

Quote:

A key problem with the focus on income gaps rather than on improving the skill attainment and job prospects for those currently at the bottom is that it panders to the absurd Marxist notion that the rich have somehow got rich at the expense of the poor. Yet there is no basis for saying that people who are not working are poor because others are earning good incomes by working hard and productively. Wealth generation is not a zero sum game.

Another key problem is that the OECD’s measure of inequality proposes that New Zealanders would be just as well off if everyone were poor as they would be if everyone were rich. This is because the only thing that matters under this measure is equality of outcome. The ideal income distribution is reached when differences in effort and skill go unrewarded. Those who work hard should earn no more than the most idle in the community.

He's straight out, freedom

Mark Hubbard's picture

He's straight out, freedom hating, Big Brother State, communist. Dreadful. It beggars belief how he's got it so wrong. There's nobody I hate more in NZ, because I take his advocacy of theft and State control of me, very personally.

Mind you, there's a glorious comment on his Herald thread from a Mike K. Quote:

Gareth is already doing his part for inequality, he has his KiwiSaver fund which has gone backwards since it started, the fees keep on coming out as the returns still plumb the negative depths.

That will even it up, making us all poorer - inequality solved.

Correction

Wattie's picture

Nutter's out of his shell Sticking out tongue

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.